Volume 18, Issue 3
  • ISSN 1572-0373
  • E-ISSN: 1572-0381
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


Some spoken words are iconic, exhibiting a resemblance between form and meaning. We used native speaker ratings to assess the iconicity of 3001 English words, analyzing their iconicity in relation to part-of-speech differences and differences between the sensory domain they relate to (sight, sound, touch, taste and smell). First, we replicated previous findings showing that onomatopoeia and interjections were highest in iconicity, followed by verbs and adjectives, and then nouns and grammatical words. We further show that words with meanings related to the senses are more iconic than words with abstract meanings. Moreover, iconicity is not distributed equally across sensory modalities: Auditory and tactile words tend to be more iconic than words denoting concepts related to taste, smell and sight. Last, we examined the relationship between iconicity (resemblance between form and meaning) and systematicity (statistical regularity between form and meaning). We find that iconicity in English words is more strongly related to sensory meanings than systematicity. Altogether, our results shed light on the extent and distribution of iconicity in modern English.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Ahlner, F. , & Zlatev, J.
    (2010) Cross-modal iconicity: A cognitive semiotic approach to sound symbolism. Sign Systems Studies, 1, 298–348. doi: 10.12697/SSS.2010.38.1‑4.11
    https://doi.org/10.12697/SSS.2010.38.1-4.11 [Google Scholar]
  2. Arata, M. , Imai, M. , Okuda, J. , Okada, H. , & Matsuda, T.
    (2010) Gesture in language: How sound symbolic words are processed in the brain. In R. Camtrabone & S. Ohlsson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp.1374–1379). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Armstrong, D. F. , & Wilcox, S. E.
    (2007) The gestural origin of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195163483.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195163483.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  4. Balota, D. A. , Yap, M. J. , Hutchison, K. A. , Cortese, M. J. , Kessler, B. , Loftis, B. , Neely, J. H. , Nelson, D. L. , Simpson, G. B. , & Treiman, R.
    (2007) The English lexicon project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445–459. doi: 10.3758/BF03193014
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193014 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bartley, S. H.
    (1953) The perception of size or distance based on tactile and kinesthetic data. The Journal of Psychology, 36, 401–408. doi: 10.1080/00223980.1953.9712906
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1953.9712906 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bergen, B. K.
    (2004) The psychological reality of phonesthemes. Language, 80, 290–311. doi: 10.1353/lan.2004.0056
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2004.0056 [Google Scholar]
  7. Blasi, D. E. , Wichmann, S. , Hammarström, H. , Stadler, P. F. , & Christiansen, M. H.
    (2016) Sound–meaning association biases evidenced across thousands of languages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113, 10818–10823. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1605782113
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1605782113 [Google Scholar]
  8. Blust, R.
    (2003) The phonestheme NG in Austronesian languages. Oceanic Linguistics, 42, 187–212.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Brysbaert, M. , New, B. , & Keuleers, E.
    (2012) Adding part-of-speech information to the SUBTLEX-US word frequencies. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 991–997. doi: 10.3758/s13428‑012‑0190‑4
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0190-4 [Google Scholar]
  10. Brysbaert, M. , Warriner, A. M. , & Kuperman, V.
    (2014) Concreteness ratings for 40 thousands generally known English word lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 904–911. doi: 10.3758/s13428‑013‑0403‑5
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0403-5 [Google Scholar]
  11. Carlson, N. R.
    (2010) Physiology of behavior (10th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Connell, L. , & Lynott, D.
    (2012) Strength of perceptual experience predicts word processing performance better than concreteness or imageability. Cognition, 125, 452–465. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.07.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.07.010 [Google Scholar]
  13. Cortese, M. J. , & Fugett, A.
    (2004) Imageability ratings for 3,000 monosyllabic words. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 384–387. doi: 10.3758/BF03195585
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195585 [Google Scholar]
  14. Crisinel, A. S. , Jones, S. , & Spence, C.
    (2012) ‘The sweet taste of maluma’: Crossmodal associations between tastes and words. Chemosensory Perception, 5, 266–273.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Cuskley, C.
    (2013) Mappings between linguistic sound and motion. Public Journal of Semiotics, 5, 39–62.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Cuskley, C. , & Kirby, S.
    (2013) Synaesthesia, cross-modality and language evolution. In J. Simner & E. M. Hubbard (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Synaesthesia (pp.869–907). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Davis, R.
    (1961) The fitness of names to drawings: A cross-cultural study in Tanganyika. British Journal of Psychology, 52, 259–268. doi: 10.1111/j.2044‑8295.1961.tb00788.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1961.tb00788.x [Google Scholar]
  18. de Saussure, F.
    (1959) [1916]. Course in General Linguistics. New York: The philosophical library.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Dingemanse, M.
    (2011a) Ideophones and the aesthetics of everyday language in a West-African society. The Senses and Society, 6, 77–85. doi: 10.2752/174589311X12893982233830
    https://doi.org/10.2752/174589311X12893982233830 [Google Scholar]
  20. (2011b) The Meaning and Use of Ideophones in Siwu. PhD dissertation. Radboud University, Nijmegen.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. (2012) Advances in the cross-linguistic study of ideophones. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6, 654–672. doi: 10.1002/lnc3.361
    https://doi.org/10.1002/lnc3.361 [Google Scholar]
  22. (2014) Making new ideophones in Siwu: Creative depiction in conversation. Pragmatics and Society, 5, 384–405. doi: 10.1075/ps.5.3.04din
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.5.3.04din [Google Scholar]
  23. Dingemanse, M. , Blasi, D. E. , Lupyan, G. , Christiansen, M. H. , & Monaghan, P.
    (2015) Arbitrariness, iconicity, and systematicity in language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19, 603–615. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2015.07.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.07.013 [Google Scholar]
  24. Dingemanse, M. , & Majid, A.
    (2012) The semantic structure of sensory vocabulary in an African language. In N. Miyake , D. Peebles , & R. P. Cooper (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp.300–305). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Dragulescu, A. A.
    (2014) xlsx: Read, write, format Excel 2007 and Excel 97/2000/XP/2003 files. R package version 0.5.7.
  26. Essegbey, J.
    (2013) Touch ideophones in Nyagbo. In O. O. Orie & K. W. Sanders (Eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Conference on African Linguistics (pp.235–243). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Etzi, R. , Spence, C. , Zampini, M. , & Gallace, A.
    (2016) When sandpaper is ‘kiki’ and satin is ‘bouba’: An exploration of the associations between words, emotional states, and the tactile attributes of everyday materials. Multisensory Research, 29, 133–155. doi: 10.1163/22134808‑00002497
    https://doi.org/10.1163/22134808-00002497 [Google Scholar]
  28. Farmer, T. A. , Christiansen, M. H. , & Monaghan, P.
    (2006) Phonological typicality influences on-line sentence comprehension. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103, 12203–12208. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0602173103
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0602173103 [Google Scholar]
  29. Fay, N. , Arbib, M. , & Garrod, S.
    (2013) How to bootstrap a human communication system. Cognitive Science, 37, 1356–1367. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12048
    https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12048 [Google Scholar]
  30. Fay, N. , Lister, C. J. , Ellison, T. M. , & Goldin-Meadow, S.
    (2014) Creating a communication system from scratch: Gesture beats vocalization hands down. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 354. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00354
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00354 [Google Scholar]
  31. Firth, J. R.
    (1930) Speech. London: Ernest Benn.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. (1935) The use and distribution of certain English sounds. English Studies, 17, 8–18. doi: 10.1080/00138383508596629
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00138383508596629 [Google Scholar]
  33. Fischer, S.
    (1922) Über das Entstehen und Verstehen von Namen. Archiv für die gesamte Psychologie, 42, 335–368.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Fontana, F.
    (2013) Association of haptic trajectories with takete and maluma. In I. Oakley & S. Brewster (Eds.), Haptic and audio interaction design (pp.60–68). Berlin: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978‑3‑642‑41068‑0_7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41068-0_7 [Google Scholar]
  35. Fox, J. , & Weisberg, S.
    (2011) An {R} companion to applied regression (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Fryer, L. , Freeman, J. , & Pring, L.
    (2014) Touching words is not enough: How visual experience influences haptic–auditory associations in the “Bouba–Kiki” effect. Cognition, 132, 164–173. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.03.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.03.015 [Google Scholar]
  37. Gallace, A. , Boschin, E. , & Spence, C.
    (2011) On the taste of “Bouba” and “Kiki”: An exploration of word–food associations in neurologically normal participants. Cognitive Neuroscience, 2, 34–46. doi: 10.1080/17588928.2010.516820
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17588928.2010.516820 [Google Scholar]
  38. Guest, S. , Catmur, C. , Lloyd, D. , & Spence, C.
    (2002) Audiotactile interactions in roughness perception. Experimental Brain Research, 146, 161–171. doi: 10.1007/s00221‑002‑1164‑z
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-002-1164-z [Google Scholar]
  39. Hashimoto, T. , Usui, N. , Taira, M. , Nose, I. , Haji, T. , & Kojima, S.
    (2006) The neural mechanism associated with the processing of onomatopoeic sounds. Neuroimage, 31, 1762–1770. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.02.019
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.02.019 [Google Scholar]
  40. Hinton, L. , Nichols, J. , & Ohala, J.
    (1994) Introduction: sound-symbolic processes. In L. Hinton , J. Nichols , & J. Ohala (Eds.), Sound Symbolism (pp.1–12). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Hockett, C. F.
    (1982 [1960]) The origin of speech. Scientific American, 203, 88–111. Reprinted in: W. S-Y Wang. (1982), Human communication: Language and its psychobiological bases (pp. 40–12). San Francisco: W. H. Freeman. doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican0960‑88
    https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0960-88 [Google Scholar]
  42. Hutchins, S. S.
    (1998) The psychological reality, variability, and compositionality of English phonesthemes. Atlanta: Emory University dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Imai, M. , Kita, S. , Nagumo, M. , & Okada, H.
    (2008) Sound symbolism facilitates early verb learning. Cognition, 109, 54–65. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.015 [Google Scholar]
  44. Imai, M. , & Kita, S.
    (2014) The sound symbolism bootstrapping hypothesis for language acquisition and language evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B, Biological Sciences, 369, 20130298. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0298
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0298 [Google Scholar]
  45. Jousmäki, V. , & Hari, R.
    (1998) Parchment-skin illusion: Sound-biased touch. Current Biology, 8, R190–R191. doi: 10.1016/S0960‑9822(98)70120‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-9822(98)70120-4 [Google Scholar]
  46. Juhasz, B. J. , & Yap, M. J.
    (2013) Sensory experience ratings for over 5,000 mono-and disyllabic words. Behavior Research Methods, 45, 160–168. doi: 10.3758/s13428‑012‑0242‑9
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0242-9 [Google Scholar]
  47. Kelly, M. H.
    (1992) Using sound to solve syntactic problems: The role of phonology in grammatical category assignments. Psychological review, 99, 349–364. doi: 10.1037/0033‑295X.99.2.349
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.99.2.349 [Google Scholar]
  48. Köhler, W.
    (1929) Gestalt Psychology. New York: Liveright.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Kwon, N. , & Round, E. R.
    (2015) Phonesthemes in morphological theory. Morphology, 25, 1–27. doi: 10.1007/s11525‑014‑9250‑z
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-014-9250-z [Google Scholar]
  50. Lockwood, G. , & Dingemanse, M.
    (2015) Iconicity in the lab: A review of behavioral, developmental, and neuroimaging research into sound-symbolism. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1246.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Lynott, D. , & Connell, L.
    (2009) Modality exclusivity norms for 423 object properties. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 558–564. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.2.558
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.2.558 [Google Scholar]
  52. (2013) Modality exclusivity norms for 400 nouns: The relationship between perceptual experience and surface word form. Behavior Research Methods, 45, 516–526. doi: 10.3758/s13428‑012‑0267‑0
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0267-0 [Google Scholar]
  53. Marchand, H.
    (1959) Phonetic symbolism in English word formations. Indogermanische Forschungen, 64, 146–168.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. (1960) The categories and types of present-day English word formation. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Marks, L. E.
    (1978) The unity of the senses: Interrelations among the modalities. New York: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/B978‑0‑12‑472960‑5.50011‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-472960-5.50011-1 [Google Scholar]
  56. Meir, I. , Padden, C. , Aronoff, M. , & Sandler, W.
    (2013) Competing iconicities in the structure of languages. Cognitive Linguistics, 24, 309–343. doi: 10.1515/cog‑2013‑0010
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2013-0010 [Google Scholar]
  57. Monaghan, P. , Shillcock, R. C. , Christiansen, M. H. , & Kirby, S.
    (2014) How arbitrary is English?Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B, Biological Sciences, 369, 20130299. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0299
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0299 [Google Scholar]
  58. Navarro, D. J.
    (2015) Learning statistics with R: A tutorial for psychology students and other beginners (Version 0.5). Adelaide: University of Adelaide.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Ngo, M. K. , Misra, R. , & Spence, C.
    (2011) Assessing the shapes and speech sounds that people associate with chocolate samples varying in cocoa content. Food Quality and Preference, 22, 567–572. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.03.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.03.009 [Google Scholar]
  60. Nielsen, A. , & Rendall, D.
    (2011) The sound of round: Evaluating the sound-symbolic role of consonants in the classic Takete-Maluma phenomenon. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 115–124. doi: 10.1037/a0022268
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022268 [Google Scholar]
  61. (2012) The source and magnitude of sound-symbolic biases in processing artificial word material and their implications for language learning and transmission. Language and Cognition, 4, 115–125. doi: 10.1515/langcog‑2012‑0007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/langcog-2012-0007 [Google Scholar]
  62. Nielsen, A. K. , & Rendall, D.
    (2013) Parsing the role of consonants versus vowels in the classic Takete-Maluma phenomenon. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 153–163. doi: 10.1037/a0030553
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030553 [Google Scholar]
  63. Ohala, J. J.
    (1994) The frequency code underlies the sound symbolic use of voice pitch. In L. Hinton , J. Nichols , & J. J. Ohala (Eds.), Sound symbolism (pp.325–347). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Osaka, N. , Osaka, M. , Morishita, M. , Kondo, H. , & Fukuyama, H.
    (2004) A word expressing affective pain activates the anterior cingulate cortex in the human brain: An fMRI study. Behavioural Brain Research, 153, 123–127. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2003.11.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2003.11.013 [Google Scholar]
  65. Paivio, A. , Yuille, J. C. , & Madigan, S. A.
    (1968) Concreteness, imagery and meaningfulness values for 925 words. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph Supplement, 76(3, Pt. 2), 1–25. doi: 10.1037/h0025327
    https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025327 [Google Scholar]
  66. Perlman, M. , & Cain, A.
    (2014) Iconicity in vocalization, comparisons with gesture, and implications for theories on the evolution of language. Gesture, 14, 321–351. doi: 10.1075/gest.14.3.03per
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.14.3.03per [Google Scholar]
  67. Perlman, M. , Dale, R. , & Lupyan, G.
    (2015) Iconicity can ground the creation of vocal symbols. Royal Society Open Science, 2, 150152. doi: 10.1098/rsos.150152
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150152 [Google Scholar]
  68. Perry, L. K. , Perlman, M. , & Lupyan, G.
    (2015) Iconicity in English and Spanish and its relation to lexical category and age of acquisition. PloS One, 10, e0137147. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0137147
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0137147 [Google Scholar]
  69. Perry, L. K. , Perlman, M. , Winter, B. , Massaro, D. M. , & Lupyan, G.
    (submitted). Iconicity in the speech of children and adults. Developmental Science, e12572 doi: 10.1111/desc.12572
    https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12572 [Google Scholar]
  70. Pinker, S. , & Bloom, P.
    (1990) Natural language and natural selection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13, 707–784. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X00081061
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00081061 [Google Scholar]
  71. Ramachandran, V. S. , & Hubbard, E. M.
    (2001) Synaesthesia – a window into perception, thought and language. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 8, 3–34.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Rhodes, R.
    (1994) Aural images. In L. Hinton , J. Nichols , & J. J. Ohala (Eds.), Sound symbolism (pp.276–292). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. R Core Team
    (2015) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Sapir, E.
    (1929) A study in phonetic symbolism. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 225–239. doi: 10.1037/h0070931
    https://doi.org/10.1037/h0070931 [Google Scholar]
  75. Schroeder, C. E. , Lindsley, R. W. , Specht, C. , Marcovici, A. , Smiley, J. F. , & Javitt, D. C.
    (2001) Somatosensory input to auditory association cortex in the macaque monkey. Journal of Neurophysiology, 85, 1322–1327. doi: 10.1152/jn.2001.85.3.1322
    https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.2001.85.3.1322 [Google Scholar]
  76. Schürmann, M. , Caetano, G. , Jousmäki, V. , & Hari, R.
    (2004) Hands help hearing: facilitatory audiotactile interaction at low sound-intensity levels. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115, 830–832. doi: 10.1121/1.1639909
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1639909 [Google Scholar]
  77. Simner, J. , Cuskley, C. , & Kirby, S.
    (2010) What sound does that taste? Cross-modal mappings across gustation and audition. Perception, 39, 553–569. doi: 10.1068/p6591
    https://doi.org/10.1068/p6591 [Google Scholar]
  78. Sutherland, S. L. , & Cimpian, A.
    (2015) An explanatory heuristic gives rise to the belief that words are well suited for their referents. Cognition, 143, 228–240. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.07.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.07.002 [Google Scholar]
  79. Suzuki, Y. , Gyoba, J. , & Sakamoto, S.
    (2008) Selective effects of auditory stimuli on tactile roughness perception. Brain Research, 1242, 87–94. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2008.06.104
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2008.06.104 [Google Scholar]
  80. Talmy, L.
    (1991) Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. Berkeley Working Papers in Linguistics, 480–519.
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Torchiano, M.
    (2015) Effsize: Efficient effect size computation. R package version 0.5.4.
  82. Urban, M.
    (2011) Conventional sound symbolism in terms for organs of speech: A cross-linguistic study. Folia Linguistica, 45(1), 199–213. doi: 10.1515/flin.2011.007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.2011.007 [Google Scholar]
  83. Usnadze, D.
    (1924) Ein experimentller Beitrag zum Problem der psychologischen Grundlagen der Namengebung. Psychologische Forschung, 5, 24–43. doi: 10.1007/BF00402395
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00402395 [Google Scholar]
  84. Vigliocco, G. , Perniss, P. , & Vinson, D.
    (2014) Language as a multimodal phenomenon: Implications for language learning, processing and evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 369, 20130292. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0292
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0292 [Google Scholar]
  85. Vinson, D. P. , Cormier, K. , Denmark, T. , Schembri, A. , & Vigliocco, G.
    (2008) The British Sign Language (BSL) norms for age of acquisition, familiarity, and iconicity. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 1079–1087. doi: 10.3758/BRM.40.4.1079
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.4.1079 [Google Scholar]
  86. Voeltz, E. F. K. , & Kilian-Hatz, C.
    (2001) Ideophones. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.44
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.44 [Google Scholar]
  87. Watanabe, J. , & Sakamoto, M.
    (2012) Comparison between onomatopoeias and adjectives for evaluating tactile sensations. Proceedings of SCIS-ISIS2012 , 2346–2348.
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Watanabe, J. , Utsunomiya, Y. , Tsukurimichi, H. , & Sakamoto, M.
    (2012) Relationship between phonemes and tactile-emotional evaluations in Japanese sound symbolic words. In N. Miyake , D. Peebles , & R. P. Cooper (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp.2517–2522). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Waugh, L. R.
    (1994) Degrees of iconicity in the lexicon. Journal of Pragmatics, 22, 55–70. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)90056‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)90056-6 [Google Scholar]
  90. Wichmann, S. , Holman, E. W. , & Brown, C. H.
    (2010) Sound symbolism in basic vocabulary. Entropy, 12, 844–858. doi: 10.3390/e12040844
    https://doi.org/10.3390/e12040844 [Google Scholar]
  91. Wickham, H. , & Francois, R.
    (2015) dplyr: A grammar of data manipulation. R package version 0.4.2.
  92. Winter, B.
    (2016a) Taste and smell words form an affectively loaded and emotionally flexible part of the English lexicon. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31, 975–988. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2016.1193619
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2016.1193619 [Google Scholar]
  93. (2016b) The sensory structure of the English lexicon. PhD thesis, University of California Merced.
  94. Yoshino, J. , Yakata, A. , Shimizu, Y. , Haginoya, M. , & Sakamoto, M.
    (2013) Method of evaluating metal textures by the sound symbolism of onomatopoeia. In The Second Asian Conference on Information Systems (pp.618–624).
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): onomatopoeia; perception; sound; sound symbolism; touch

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error